The related applications detail a variety of electronic access systems. Many are characterized by a variety of disparate lock types (e.g. padlocks, door locks, vaults), each of which is operable by a common electronic key.
In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, a key nest is provided that is well suited for use on locks of disparate types. The nest forms a recess for receiving part of the key, and desirably holding same in place. One or more electrical connectors in the nest establish contact with one or more corresponding contacts on the key.
In accordance with another aspect of the invention, a door lock controller is integrated with an alarm controller, so that a user needn't separately deal with both the door lock and an alarm console when entering and leaving a building.
In many prior art systems, the door lock controller and the alarm controller are separate units. A user entering a secured facility first operates the electronic door lock. Once the door is opened, the user has a brief period (e.g. 30 seconds) within which to disarm the alarm (e.g. by entering a PIN number). On leaving the building the reverse sequence occurs. First the user re-arms the alarm (e.g. by re-entry of the PIN number). A brief delay period then follows before the alarm takes effect, allowing the user to exit the building. Once outside the building, the user re-locks the door.
One improvement to such systems is to integrate the door lock controller and the alarm controller. By such arrangement, unlocking the door also disarms the alarm. Similarly, locking the door re-arms the alarm.
A further improvement to such systems is to arrange the lock to automatically re-lock after a brief period. This improvement, however, introduces a problem: keeping the state of the alarm in synchrony with the door lock.
Consider the case of a delivery entrance to a fast food restaurant. Some suppliers may make deliveries to the restaurant before any employees arrive, and so are provided with their own keys. To track the coming and going of such suppliers, restaurants are increasingly using electronic door locks that compile a log of lock activity, detailing the particular keyholders who open the door, together with the dates and times of such accesses.
The way such a system is supposed to work is that the supplier arrives and engages the key with a lock controller mounted outside the building. So doing toggles the state of a first relay (or switching circuitry) controlling a door lock solenoid or motor, switching the door lock from locked to unlocked. So doing also toggles the state of a second relay (or switching circuitry) controlling the alarm state, switching the alarm from armed to disarmed. The supplier then makes the delivery. Prior to driving away, the supplier engages the key with the lock controller a second time. So doing toggles the first relay back to locking the door, and toggles the second relay back to arming the alarm.
While restaurants strictly admonish their suppliers to follow this procedure, it is desirable to take precautionary steps in case a supplier forgets. In particular, restaurants want to guard against the possibility of the door being left unlocked if the supplier neglects to relock the door prior to departing. To provide a fail-safe situation, such door locks can be made to automatically re-lock after a brief interval.
Unfortunately, the alarm cannot similarly be automatically re-armed. (I.e. the door lock and alarm cannot be controlled by the same relay/switching circuit). The supplier may still be unloading supplies, or may be otherwise occupied inside the premises. Automatically re-arming the alarm whenever the door is automatically re-locked would cause numerous false alarms. Accordingly, a situation can arise where the door is locked, yet the alarm is disarmed.
If a supplier leaves the restaurant in this anomalous state, and a second supplier then visits, a false alarm is likely to occur. When the second supplier engages the key with the lock, this toggles the door lock from locked to unlocked. But it also toggles the alarm from disarmed to armed. When the second supplier enters the restaurant, the motion is detected by the armed alarm system and an alarm is sounded.
In accordance with a second aspect of the present invention, the foregoing problem is solved. One embodiment detects the anomalous state and, when a key is next presented to the lock, the door lock is opened but the alarm state is not changed. In a particular embodiment, this operation is performed in two phases. In the first, the state of the alarm is toggled back to armed while the door remains locked. In the second, the states of both the lock and the alarm are toggled, e.g. to unlocked and dis-armed. By this arrangement, security is enhanced against human error, without increasing the possibility of false alarms.
The foregoing and additional features and advantages of the invention will be more readily apparent from the following detailed description, which proceeds with reference to the accompanying drawings.